TSAR and VCA pour homme reformulations, please advise me

today i got both Tsar and VCA, blind buy based on reviews.
the VCA is in a black box, white letters, the bottle states - VCA, eau de toilette. i thought this is the recent version, which has been pointed as closer to the original than the previous reformulation. though the dry down is so soapy... i think now this might be the first reformulation. is it?
Tsar came in a box greenish-blackish mix, golden letters, i have not even opened it yet, intending to return it. on the picture i refered to when buying, it was a green box, same outlook as the VCA i got. i thought the plain black box for VCA and the plain green box for Tsar are their recent versions which everybody here points as better than the previous reformulations.
would you please enlighten me in the confusion?

Re: TSAR and VCA pour homme reformulations, please advise me

Well, I can't comment on the various boxes, but I bought both of these based on basenotes recommendations, and have got to say that I'm not a fan of VC&A. I gave both VC&A PH and Tsar away and they both sound like the kind of thing I would like. I didn't hate them, but I wrote them off after a few wears in favor of better (IMHO) stuff.

Re: TSAR and VCA pour homme reformulations, please advise me

thank you. i got it all reversed and thought that the plain boxes are the better ones. though i am not excited about the tsar that i got right. it is like a weaker- and somewhat herbal aramis, my first impression.

Re: TSAR and VCA pour homme reformulations, please advise me

since i like the opening and the middle of the VCA i got (the plain black box), but i don't like at all the soapy messed up dry down, do you think i should invest in the latest VCA version? how is the dry down there? is it the scent in general stronger?

Re: TSAR and VCA pour homme reformulations, please advise me

I didn't do a side by side comparison, but I've had the opportunity to try the original spray version of Tsar (which has a sticker on the front of the bottle you can peel off) and the version that is clear with copper-colored sprayer top area. The original seems brighter (perhaps more juniper) and "harder" (with more of a wood and amber accord in the base). The clear bottle version seems softer, more powdery, and with a vintage Quorum type leathery quality (though no tobacco) that I don't remember in the original. Bother are excellent in their own ways and neither is weak. Coconut is listed and I can believe that in the clear bottle but didn't get a sense of that in the original.

It's simple: for both you have to buy the leaf pattern boxes, and not the all black (pour homme) and certainly not the ruined first reformulation of Tsar in the transparant bottle! The one shown by perfaddict is the one to buy and closest to the original. I own both as well and can say that the Pour homme does not have that soapy drydown mess and is strong as hell! Lasts all day for sure! The Tsar maybe has to grow on you but is indeed a complete different scent and on me it got stronger and stronger the more I wore it! A real classic smell and one of the most masculine ones there is imo.

@mspa

You said: i thought the plain black box for VCA and the plain green box for Tsar are their recent versions which everybody here points as better than the previous reformulations.
would you please enlighten me in the confusion?

It is indeed the other way around!
I guess the house of VC & A got so many complaints about both first reformulation of both frags, that they reformulated it again to both being way way more close to the original vintage versions!

Re: TSAR and VCA pour homme reformulations, please advise me

Originally Posted by Slayerized

...the ruined first reformulation of Tsar in the transparant bottle!

It isn't helpful to say that a frag is "ruined" without explaining exactly what you mean. For example, some reformulations are simply a different frag altogether (which is not the case here), while others seem to be made with low-quality ingredients. That's not the case here either, AFAICT. When I tried the first reformulation of Xeryus, that seemed to be a real step down in terms of ingredient quality, but the clear glass bottle of Tsar seems quite close to the original, and there's nothing at all "wrong" with it, unless you wanted exactly what the original was like. I was consciously seeking out anything I could think of that might be problematic, but I found none. This is a quality formulation, unlike so many other reformulations that I thought were awful, for reasons mentioned above. Please be clear and specific or don't call frags awful, ruined, or the like; that's just not fair and provides "ammunition"' to those who claim that talk about reformulations is nonsense.

Re: TSAR and VCA pour homme reformulations, please advise me

You are a busy man when you are telling this to everyone who uses these kind of words on bad reformulations, lol

Anyway, what I meant was of course that it doesn't smell any similar to the original while it should otherwise they (VC & A) should rename the scent into a complete different one as it had not much to do with the vintage. So they failed in making this Tsar No.2 so to speak and ruined the first version in their attempt to copy it with cheaper ingredients or whatever they do with all those reformulations. "Ruined" as I used the word did not! mean the frag is bad in quality itself. I hope this cleared things up for you! Cheers

Originally Posted by Bigsly

It isn't helpful to say that a frag is "ruined" without explaining exactly what you mean. For example, some reformulations are simply a different frag altogether (which is not the case here), while others seem to be made with low-quality ingredients. That's not the case here either, AFAICT. When I tried the first reformulation of Xeryus, that seemed to be a real step down in terms of ingredient quality, but the clear glass bottle of Tsar seems quite close to the original, and there's nothing at all "wrong" with it, unless you wanted exactly what the original was like. I was consciously seeking out anything I could think of that might be problematic, but I found none. This is a quality formulation, unlike so many other reformulations that I thought were awful, for reasons mentioned above. Please be clear and specific or don't call frags awful, ruined, or the like; that's just not fair and provides "ammunition"' to those who claim that talk about reformulations is nonsense.

Re: TSAR and VCA pour homme reformulations, please advise me

Originally Posted by mspa

since i like the opening and the middle of the VCA i got (the plain black box), but i don't like at all the soapy messed up dry down, do you think i should invest in the latest VCA version? how is the dry down there? is it the scent in general stronger?

I recently purchased the NEW version as pictured and was not impressed. Another poster mentioned that the version that Nieman Marcus/Bergdoff Goodman sells is better than what other stores sell....I agree. For some reason it was richer and longer lasting. Van Cleef and Arpels sells exclusively to BG.

The bottle that I recently purchased in Mexico was not as impressive as the store's tester that I tried. Go figure. A soapy rose is what I got. I tried it twice then dumped the bottle in the trash (50ml).

I say if you really want to buy it purchase it at Neimans online.

"NO" I don't think you need it. There are better fragrances out there. Same goes with Tsar...Too many green fragrances out there to worry about just one.

Re: TSAR and VCA pour homme reformulations, please advise me

Before I bought this new version some months ago, I tested it everywhere in Holland to be sure I wanted it (even when visiting Paris) and everywhere it smelled the same to me (I only tried this formula).............I don't understand that there is a significant difference in juice of this bottle? Maybe it was mixed up with first reformulation in all black box and with different script on bottle.

Tsar is pretty much one of a kind fragrance and if one likes it a lot, he must go for it as there are many greens out there indeed but not like Tsar! There are always better frags out there so to speak no matter what frag one talks about.

Originally Posted by thatmakesscents

I recently purchased the NEW version as pictured and was not impressed. Another poster mentioned that the version that Nieman Marcus/Bergdoff Goodman sells is better than what other stores sell....I agree. For some reason it was richer and longer lasting. Van Cleef and Arpels sells exclusively to BG.

The bottle that I recently purchased in Mexico was not as impressive as the store's tester that I tried. Go figure. A soapy rose is what I got. I tried it twice then dumped the bottle in the trash (50ml).

I say if you really want to buy it purchase it at Neimans online.

"NO" I don't think you need it. There are better fragrances out there. Same goes with Tsar...Too many green fragrances out there to worry about just one.

Re: TSAR and VCA pour homme reformulations, please advise me

Originally Posted by Slayerized

You are a busy man when you are telling this to everyone who uses these kind of words on bad reformulations, lol

Anyway, what I meant was of course that it doesn't smell any similar to the original while it should otherwise they (VC & A) should rename the scent into a complete different one as it had not much to do with the vintage. So they failed in making this Tsar No.2 so to speak and ruined the first version in their attempt to copy it with cheaper ingredients or whatever they do with all those reformulations. "Ruined" as I used the word did not! mean the frag is bad in quality itself. I hope this cleared things up for you! Cheers

As they say here (baseball language), I call them as I see them. We can agree to disagree that clear glass Tsar is ruined or awful; I just want to know why a person thinks that way. I think it could have been called Quorum Fraicheur, actually! LOL.

Re: TSAR and VCA pour homme reformulations, please advise me

Lol, Quorum Fraicheur would something I'd try!

Anyway, imo, a house should try to make a reformulation as close as possible to the original and not to make it an almost complete different scent and still calling it the same (in this case Tsar), disappointing lots of people who bought it as they couldn't get the original anymore. Same with eg. Dolce&Gabbana ph, The Dreamer, Zino, Cool water which are hard to compare with their original predecessors imho! Maybe I should have said it differently and not using the word 'ruined' but this is my explanation.

Originally Posted by Bigsly

As they say here (baseball language), I call them as I see them. We can agree to disagree that clear glass Tsar is ruined or awful; I just want to know why a person thinks that way. I think it could have been called Quorum Fraicheur, actually! LOL.

Re: TSAR and VCA pour homme reformulations, please advise me

I don't think it's that different, but if you do, and dislike it for that reason, that's all I wanted to know. Now I'm getting some sandalwood coming through on the clear glass Tsar, and I have to say, I think the quality on this one is very good, in terms of ingredients, development, blending, etc. It is possible that you did try a bad formulation and I tried a good one but they are in the same kind of bottle (they may have had extra bottles so they used the older ones, for example).

Re: TSAR and VCA pour homme reformulations, please advise me

The only VCA pour homme I've smelled is the one in the leafy package, and it smells great. Very unique fragrance, VERY strong, and it gets a surprising number of compliments, especially considering it's relatively inexpensive.

Re: TSAR and VCA pour homme reformulations, please advise me

Cannot agree more!

Originally Posted by barclaydetolly

The only VCA pour homme I've smelled is the one in the leafy package, and it smells great. Very unique fragrance, VERY strong, and it gets a surprising number of compliments, especially considering it's relatively inexpensive.